From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03EA32012C3; Sat, 23 May 2015 22:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by qkgx75 with SMTP id x75so42740097qkg.1; Sat, 23 May 2015 22:17:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=ogUFtUpadM6QhpW1Aq4tHD1JLWSAHXS5XOzHZx+Ve5k=; b=O/mke0TuKhvaeR/0+o4zKCwDm6FzgwJnM8SH0c6s21ZQxdf+2Uy6ffJiaVbfNZS62R hl9j1zOUbpCdtFKPmlWYCPzH9NDXgJ+EN58fzDvaWB+PRCbJHPqHbaPihmyE2Xh7JwGN akpIed4TgfwTILAg04MQKcQKHpYi43L0uBPnf9B8OkWcY9wbotYo7m107H036f+JfkYC RuxHB5Zt4ti0U2/qd/JltVD9qdygzD9BsxhKZPC0iMMsZNhhQ9A1lTP3tBQjMX6Z1LqC gXOPBaxLG6y3Nt+MZdI0WTSyrHLRAFq0CfPPKzNnUlX95vidkVUqmfodz1D9YRWbyH4w xcxA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.19.169 with SMTP id 38mr20107595qgh.75.1432444666854; Sat, 23 May 2015 22:17:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.96.187.71 with HTTP; Sat, 23 May 2015 22:17:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 22:17:46 -0700 Message-ID: From: Aaron Wood To: bloat , cerowrt-devel Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134f2628741cb0516cd03af Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] sqm-scripts on WRT1900AC X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 May 2015 05:21:43 -0000 --001a1134f2628741cb0516cd03af Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 All, I've been lurking on the OpenWRT forum, looking to see when the CC builds for the WRT1900AC stabilized, and they seem to be so (for a very "beta"-ish version of stable). So I went ahead and loaded up the daily ( CHAOS CALMER (Bleeding Edge, r45715)). After getting Luci and sqm-scripts installed, I did a few baseline tests. Wifi to the MacBook Pro is... broken. 30Mbps vs. 90+ on the stock firmware. iPhone is fine (80-90Mbps download speed from the internet). After some rrul runs, this is what I ended up with: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/538967 sqm-scripts are set for: 100Mbps download 10Mbps upload fq_codel ECN no-squash don't ignore Here's a before run, with the stock firmware: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/337392 So, unfortunately, it's still leaving 50Mbps on the table. However, if I set the ingress limit higher (130Mbps), buffering is still controlled. Not as well, though. from +5ms to +10ms, with lots of jitter. But it still looks great to the dslreports test: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/538990 But the upside? load is practically nil. The WRT1900AC, with it's dual-core processor is more than enough to keep up with this (from a load point of view), but it seems like the bottleneck isn't the raw CPU power (cache?). I'll get a writeup with graphs on the blog tomorrow (I hope). -Aaron --001a1134f2628741cb0516cd03af Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
All,

I've been lurking on the OpenW= RT forum, looking to see when the CC builds for the WRT1900AC stabilized, a= nd they seem to be so (for a very "beta"-ish version of stable).<= /div>

So I went ahead and loaded up the daily (=C2=A0CHA= OS CALMER (Bleeding Edge, r45715)).

After getting = Luci and sqm-scripts installed, I did a few baseline tests.=C2=A0 Wifi to t= he MacBook Pro is... =C2=A0broken. =C2=A030Mbps vs. 90+ on the stock firmwa= re. =C2=A0iPhone is fine (80-90Mbps download speed from the internet).

After some rrul runs, this is what I ended up with:

sqm-scripts= are set for:
100Mbps download
10Mbps upload
= fq_codel
ECN
no-squash
don't ignore
=

Here's a before run, with the stock firmware:
=

So, unfortunat= ely, it's still leaving 50Mbps on the table.

H= owever, if I set the ingress limit higher (130Mbps), buffering is still con= trolled.=C2=A0 Not as well, though. =C2=A0from +5ms to +10ms, with lots of = jitter.=C2=A0 But it still looks great to the dslreports test:
http://www.dslreports.= com/speedtest/538990

But the upside? =C2= =A0load is practically nil.=C2=A0 The WRT1900AC, with it's dual-core pr= ocessor is more than enough to keep up with this (from a load point of view= ), but it seems like the bottleneck isn't the raw CPU power (cache?).

I'll get a writeup with graphs on the blog tomo= rrow (I hope).

-Aaron
--001a1134f2628741cb0516cd03af--